More impressive NBA Finals record: 5-0 or 5-3

[ceiling raiser]

I just can't see any situation where a team getting knocked out earlier than the finals is a bigger success than making the finals and losing.

I wouldn't say a bigger success, but it makes evaluation much tougher IMO.

Look at like the Kings or Suns in the West recently, or even going back further, look at the Bucks in the 80s East. Were those teams better than some squads from the other conference that made it to the Finals? I'd say yes. Am I going to say they were more successful than the squads from the weaker conference who *did* make the Finals? No, but I can't definitively say the opposite is true, either.

[BmanInBigD]

give me 5-0 every time. Making it 3 times more losing is not as good as being perfect

So losing earlier in the playoffs, or even not making them at all, is better than losing in the Finals? I just don't get that kind of logic. Like I said earlier, the ONLY way that makes sense is if the first player had his career shortened to 5 years due to injury or death.

[Hawk]

Losing earlier is never better. Making it more times into the Finals is always better. A player that has been in the Finals 8 times has had more success than the other player that made it just 5 times, leaving aside the rest of things that can make someone's career successful (awards,all-stars,olympics,etc...).

Now, more impressive? That's a different matter. I am more impressed by what 09' Lebron did than by what 11' Lebron did. 11' Lebron was more successful, 09' Lebron was more impressive.

I do understand though that I might be overthinking, since the sample size of 5-0 and 5-3 is huge compared to the example I wrote above this line.

[JordansBulls]

Depends is the guy who went 5-3 the guy who had no competition in his conference like the 80's west?

[Nbafanatic]

All that matters is how you perform. Jordan's playoff runs from 89 and 90 are stronger to me than any of the seasons from the second three peat. Why? Because he performed better. He can't be penalized for all the things he could not control, if the rest of the team is not ready yet, for instance. And I love Lebron, but he was out of the GOAT discussion after the 11 finals. A superstar like him cannot afford such a super no-show like that and still be in the race for the greatest of all time. So, It's impossible to answer this question without context.

[spectacularmove]

To everyone comparing different teams, different players, or asking for more context:

Shut up, and learn to read.

The first post explicitly says more impressive for a player. "A" as in singular, "player" as in not an entire team, Einstein. If you're bringing up the 2002 Kings vs the 2002 Nets, or Michael Jordan vs LeBron James, then get off RealGM and enroll yourself in some adult education reading comprehension classes at your local community college. The comparison is between a player with 5 championships, and the same player now with an additional 3 Finals losses. Whatever value you would give to 3 Finals losses, that's still better than nothing. To argue otherwise is downright idiotic -- akin to preferring 5 hundred dollar bills over 5 hundred dollar bills and 3 pennies.

Ironic that you're calling people out for reading comprehension classes. The OP is asking which is more impressive, not which had the most success. Take a look at this post

Now, more impressive? That's a different matter. I am more impressed by what 09' Lebron did than by what 11' Lebron did. 11' Lebron was more successful, 09' Lebron was more impressive.

Im asking you Kabstah, do you think 11' Lebron was more impressive than 09'Lebron?

[kabstah]

To everyone comparing different teams, different players, or asking for more context:

Shut up, and learn to read.

The first post explicitly says more impressive for a player. "A" as in singular, "player" as in not an entire team, Einstein. If you're bringing up the 2002 Kings vs the 2002 Nets, or Michael Jordan vs LeBron James, then get off RealGM and enroll yourself in some adult education reading comprehension classes at your local community college. The comparison is between a player with 5 championships, and the same player now with an additional 3 Finals losses. Whatever value you would give to 3 Finals losses, that's still better than nothing. To argue otherwise is downright idiotic -- akin to preferring 5 hundred dollar bills over 5 hundred dollar bills and 3 pennies.

Ironic that you're calling people out for reading comprehension classes. The OP is asking which is more impressive, not which had the most success. Take a look at this post

Now, more impressive? That's a different matter. I am more impressed by what 09' Lebron did than by what 11' Lebron did. 11' Lebron was more successful, 09' Lebron was more impressive.

Im asking you Kabstah, do you think 11' Lebron was more impressive than 09'Lebron?

In regards to career 2011 LeBron is absolutely more impressive than 2009 LeBron, because the former includes all of the latter's accomplishments, plus more.

Comparing individual seasons is an irrelevant tangent.

[MisterHibachi]

I was more impressed by Kobe's 08 season than his 10 season.

[Nbafanatic]

I was more impressed by Kobe's 08 season than his 10 season.

Me too. All his western conference playoff was amazing, looking as closer as it gets of a more unselfish Kobe. Even in the finals, against an all time great defense, he had a good overall series, at least comparable to 96 Jordan against the Sonics, for instance.

[Nbafanatic]

To everyone comparing different teams, different players, or asking for more context:

Shut up, and learn to read.

The first post explicitly says more impressive for a player. "A" as in singular, "player" as in not an entire team, Einstein. If you're bringing up the 2002 Kings vs the 2002 Nets, or Michael Jordan vs LeBron James, then get off RealGM and enroll yourself in some adult education reading comprehension classes at your local community college. The comparison is between a player with 5 championships, and the same player now with an additional 3 Finals losses. Whatever value you would give to 3 Finals losses, that's still better than nothing. To argue otherwise is downright idiotic -- akin to preferring 5 hundred dollar bills over 5 hundred dollar bills and 3 pennies.

Ironic that you're calling people out for reading comprehension classes. The OP is asking which is more impressive, not which had the most success. Take a look at this post

Now, more impressive? That's a different matter. I am more impressed by what 09' Lebron did than by what 11' Lebron did. 11' Lebron was more successful, 09' Lebron was more impressive.

Im asking you Kabstah, do you think 11' Lebron was more impressive than 09'Lebron?

In regards to career 2011 LeBron is absolutely more impressive than 2009 LeBron, because the former includes all of the latter's accomplishments, plus more.

Comparing individual seasons is an irrelevant tangent.

I disagree. That's is the fundamental reason why context is so crucial. 2009 Lebron's performance weights heavier for his career than 2011 because in 2009 he had a bigger role on a weaker team and had a stronger playoff run in 3 series than in 4 series in 2011, when he choked big time in the finals. So, the way you perform rules... You are allowed to lose before the finals if you played great. That's hold greater value than going into the last round and embarass yourself.

[kabstah]

Ironic that you're calling people out for reading comprehension classes. The OP is asking which is more impressive, not which had the most success. Take a look at this post


Im asking you Kabstah, do you think 11' Lebron was more impressive than 09'Lebron?

In regards to career 2011 LeBron is absolutely more impressive than 2009 LeBron, because the former includes all of the latter's accomplishments, plus more.

Comparing individual seasons is an irrelevant tangent.

I disagree. That's is the fundamental reason why context is so crucial. 2009 Lebron's performance weights heavier for his career than 2011 because in 2009 he had a bigger role on a weaker team and had a stronger playoff run in 3 series than in 4 series in 2011, when he choked big time in the finals. So, the way you perform rules... You are allowed to lose before the finals if you played great. That's hold greater value than going into the last round and embarass yourself.

You're still comparing individual seasons, when the conversation is about career.

LeBron's career through 2011 was better than his career through 2009 or 2010. The 2011 Finals run still adds to his legacy, ie: it's better than nothing, despite him playing poorly in a loss.